August, 1929 



EVOLUTION 



Page Seven- 



part of any living, intelligent man to the effect that 

 Grod made all stars or siderial systems in one moment. 

 "In the begininng God created the heavens." You can 

 stretch that just as far as you want to. 



Go back sixty millions or two hundred and forty 

 millions as others of them say, or go back if you want 

 to into the billions and trillions as others of them say, 

 or go back if you want to to the eternity of matter. 

 Some worlds will be older than others. That is no con- 

 firmation whatever of Evolution ! 



Now, the other thing that I have forgotten to touch 

 upon is that there is not, he said, one single form of 

 life that does not answer to the evolutionary hypothesis. 

 On the other hand, I dare assert that there is not one 

 form of life, known to the human being, that does 

 answer to it. Not one. Not one known living man has 

 ever seen anything in nature's processes that could for 

 one minute be employed as proof that the process 

 known as evolution was going on at all. Not a thing. 



I lectured one night in South Minnesota. A lioy 

 who had been two years in high school and who had 

 the textbooks given him, came up to me and said : 

 "You have done very well. I think you have 



proved that we cannot prove our position. Neither 



ran you prove yours." 



I said: "How many illustrations would you like?" 



He said : "Give me a few." 



I said : "I can give you a million examples right on 

 the farm." Have you ever heard of a hen that hatched 

 anything than a chicken? Have you ever heard of fuy 

 animal or any plant that produced after another kind? 

 Have you ? Varieties, yes, but species, none : 



That is the testimony of Bateson, and the moment 

 he said it, they discredited him. If you agree with us. 

 you are a scientist, but if you .dissent you are not a 

 scientist and you are ignorant. That is the process of 

 argument that Evolutionists employ. 



Bees and ants we can trace farther Isack than al- 

 most anything else. Out of 9,560 separate specimens 

 93 species and 43 genera Wheeler and Ford said there 

 was not a particle of change in all the ages throughout 

 which they could trace them. No evolution anywhere. 

 There is your case. Professor. You were asking for 

 one. Set that down, if you please. 



I read an article in the Atlantic Monthly some two 

 or three years ago on evolution wrecked on the bees' 

 knees. I said: "This is news to me." I did not know- 

 there were bees' knees. I can prove by the bees' knees 

 that evolution is impossible. 



He said that everytjiing that the bee does involves 

 him in sticky stuff. When he varnishes the base to 

 build, when he gets into the comb that he works into 

 the interstices of his body, it is sticky stuff'. When he 

 gets nectar, it is sticky stuff. Every single one of them 

 would gum him up in such a way that, like some 

 people — no personal reference. Professor— he won'd 

 be stuck on himself ; he would perish but for one 

 thing: viz., he goes down on his knees and there are 

 combs, and he cleans the antennae and ])roboscis on 

 the combs. 



How many million years would it require for that 

 l)ee to evolve a comb on his knee that was adequate to 

 its demand, and would it not perish a million times? 

 While waiting the evolution, admit adajitation and you 

 ciincede intelligent creation. 



I want now to conclude wliat 1 liave to say in this 

 second address by going back again to the question as 

 to whether it should be taught. Here, again. I charge 

 the Professor with insincerity, absolute insincerity. 



It is certainly the truth that the great moral law, 

 the decalogue of the Bil)le. is true. 1 f not. then all the 

 nations of the world — his own included — have gone 

 wrong : and yet he is not in the company of those that 

 have pleaded to have that book placed or retained in 

 tlie pu))lic schools. Not at all. Why not be consistent? 



It you are going to teach everything, whether the 

 people want it or not, why not bring the Bible that 

 was banished back? There are only six states that 

 will not permit the Bible to exist in them by law. There 

 are six that demand its reading m the school.s. And 

 there are thirty odd that leave it up to the attorney 

 general and to the superintendent of instruction, and 

 in practically every case they have l)anished the Bible. 

 ( .Applause. ) I know the reason why it is rejected. It 

 is impalatal)le to infidels and atheists! 



[f you are going to teach this theory, then teach side 

 by side with it, the creative theory. If we are going to 

 ha\e men lecturing in school on evolution, then I dare 

 tlieni til let me lecture therein on creation. Only in a 

 few instances can we get them to concede that favor. 



I am here tonight to tell you that when this doctrine 

 Iiecomes a little more recognized, you will reap the 

 fruitful harvest that is sweeping over our land now. 



I spent the past summer in Scotland and Ireland. 

 I he overwhelming majority of the people of that 

 country do not believe in this doctrine. They do not 

 be'ieve in it, and I know it from immediate contact 

 with the people. I am not talking to you about a few 

 jjrofessors. I am talking to you about people at large. 



Unfortunately, a good many of the criminals of that 

 country, just because it is easy to cross the ocean, have 

 come over to our side, and we have more than be- 

 long to us. (Applause and hisses.) 



There was a time when the deism doctrine — verj 

 nuich nkin to this — in fact, it is identical with it in 

 manv respects — it says th^it God had nothing to di.' 

 with creative acts; that He created tlie universe. an( 

 started it and went off and left it. 



Now, they said He did not create it. That i^ tin 

 doctrine of evolution. It leaves God out. 



.And the Professor himself is a special advocate of 

 the .same doctrine that was put into Haeckel's "Riddle 

 of the I^niverse" ruling God out. (Applause.) 



And France went through the strain of deism. 



.Vnd what was the result? The Reign of Terror. 



Professor Williams of Oxford University said of 



f!i? Nietzsche philosophy — that is this identical thing — 



that he was tlie only man that had lived that had the 



h.ard'linod to carrv it. to its legitimate results, and when 



I. Continued on Page 12) 



